France Adopts Law That Uses Informants To Monitor Private Conversations For “Hate Speech”

Jean-Batave is a martial artist from the viking stronghold of Normandy, France. He travels the world looking for new fighting techniques and new beautiful women. Eastern Europe taught him everything he knows and is his second home. His column runs every Thursday.

The French Government, led by Emmanuel Macron, adopted a law on the 5th of August 2017 punishing non-public “provocations, insults & slander” against those who are (or not) part of a certain group based on their supposed race, religion, gender identity, sexual orientation, etc. This unprecedented measure relies on tips that inform and extract private conversations and exchanges. If found guilty, the accused can face prison, heavy fines, or “re-education”.

Parody comes to life

This measure comes after the Night of The Digital Knives and recent crackdowns led by Western liberal governments against views that they brand as “hate speech.”

In France, the usual suspects holding the reins of power already made sure to direct their sanctions entirely against the subversive voices that dared speak their mind against the globalist narrative in public, but from now on, you are not allowed to express your opinion behind closed doors.

This motion was obviously adopted in quasi-secrecy and none of the French media reported on it. It is one the heaviest attacks on free speech ever created in the modern Western world.

A law that reflects the fragility of the liberal mind

This is a real headline

Here is a rough English translation of the new law. There is no definition given in the text of what is “racist”, “transphobic” or “intolerant”—it will be decided by your accuser and the jury, but something tells me that heterosexual right-wing white men, being at the bottom of the “victimhood pyramid,” will be the great majority of those targeted. “Everyone I don’t like is Hitler” comes to life in the form of a decree that punishes dissenting citizens, without investigating if what they declare is the truth or not.

If you say something offensive in a private conversation, on social media, in telephone calls, or in your emails, you can be prosecuted and your life destroyed.

The law is enforced through outside tips and informers that can only come from the ones close to you. I would not be surprised if the state introduces a monetary reward system or bounties for the tips and information given to the government about “problematic elements”.

Sanctions worthy of an Orwellian regime

In addition to prison sentences, category five fines between 1500 and 3000 euros usually accompany offenses of the same type that are uttered in public. Here is the section of this law that describes the new penalties:

Art.R. 625-8-2. Persons guilty of the offences detailed in this section shall incur, in addition to the penalties already in vigour, the following additional penalties:

(1) The prohibition of applying for or carrying, for a period of not more than three years, a weapon subject to authorisation;

(2) The confiscation of one or more weapons of which the condemned is the owner or of which he has the legal access;

(3) The confiscation of the device which served or was intended to commit the offence or the item which is the product of the said device;

(4) Community service for a period of twenty to one hundred and twenty hours;

(5) The obligation to perform, if necessary at his own expense, a training course of citizenship and civility.

Your weapon, legally purchased, will be seized and you can’t apply for a permit. Your right as a citizen to legally possess a weapon is nullified because you upset someone with words.

Loading...

The device used to relay the “insult” is confiscated. Phones, computer, tablets will be held by the state. It is evident that the device will be investigated for evidence of additional “hate speech.” If found, heavier charges can be made.

The citizenship training course (if it is the same one currently approved by French courts) will teach one the “republican values of tolerance and the respect of human dignity”. You will be taught the correct way to think.

That would not be a French law without double standards

The French government is taking a radical step against thought crime. Stiff measures already existed to punish dissenting wrong-think in public, but now the Rubicon is once more crossed with this law relying solely on informants, alleged accusations, broad interpretation, and subjective opinion.

Stating facts in a private conversations will be now racist, homophobic, ableist or LGBTZOZZLEOphobe. If I enter the privacy of my own home and declare “God, I wish I had an eye for every existing gender”, as I have two eyes and I am white, all the xirs and xers fluid demisexual otherkins of the neighbourhood can now drag me to court.

Obviously, this does not apply to those calling for the death of whites, exhorting their followers to use trucks of peace against pedestrians, or defend and celebrate paedophilia as a beautiful thing.

One further step towards madness

It echoes the numerous cases of vocal right-wing activists that got tried and were found guilty of hate speech in the past. Some might have heard of Boris Le Lay, a monarchist right-wing blogger from Brittany who got sentenced to six years of prison (he is still in exile) for saying that Black Celts never existed in his native Brittany (a known historical fact)

The comedian Dieudonné, whose status as a famous black person did not protect from the almighty French multiculturalists, and Jewish conservative writer and journalist Eric Zemmour both collected hefty fines for their speech.

After multiple attacks on French soil by Islamic terrorists, the priority of the state is not protecting French life but going after those who expose the lies of their narrative.

Comment s’en protéger

Delete Facebook and its useless counterparts if you have not yet done so. It is waste of time and a clever tool for the establishment to gather information on you and possibly use them against you in the future.

Use VPNs & install the browser Brave which does not track your data. The /pol/ board of 4chan lead the charge against the Google behemoth by promoting the software Adnauseam which clicks adds for you randomly and forces the company to refund advertisers. Moliere’s article is excellent on the subject of online anonymity.

If the many articles here have not convinced you of the war that is going on, I must refresh your memory. This is a cultural war. The government will not help you, and is your number one enemy. You are nothing but cattle to the elite. If you rebel and get caught, you will be dealt with and vaporised.

Get yourself in order, become bullet-proof, weight you actions, count on your brothers, do not accept the elite’s lies, and keep fighting with every breath and you might prevail.

110 Responses

How is this different from Soviet times? Looks like we didn’t defeat communism at all. In Germany and England they already have the police knocking on your door if you’re a meanie against Islamic migration on social networking.

I don’t really agree, although perhaps the whole left-right dichotomy is insufficient, not least because ‘right’ implies conservative, when very often it has nothing to do with conservativism, and shares fundamental features with the totalitarian left.

As for Hitler requiring that people ‘deserve to live’, this is actually quite in keeping with many of the early left / socialist preoccupations with progressing and evolving society to the next stage. the fabian socialist George Bernard Shaw for instance was also a eugenicist and argued precisely that people need to justify their existence, i.e. demonstrate that they are deserve to live and are making an adequate social contribution:

He also praised both Hitler and Stalin and according to the New Statesman wrote that:

“The only fundamental and possible socialism is the socialisation of the selective breeding of man.” Bertrand Russell proposed that the state should issue colour-coded “procreation tickets” to prevent the gene pool of the elite being diluted by inferior human beings. Those who decided to have children with holders of a different-coloured ticket would be punished with a heavy fine. [Likewise, the socialist] HG Wells praised eugenics as the first step towards the elimination of “detrimental types and characteristics” and the “fostering of desirable types” instead.”

Nazis and socialists are cut from the same cloth. They have nothing to do with conservativism, nothing to do with liberty / liberatarianism, and nothing to do with any kind of humanitarianism, except where the latter implies atheism rather consideration for ones fellow man

To be fair I personally do not want anything to do with conservativism. the “liberty” movement is toothless at this point.

Also, personally I divide the left vs right based on the following concepts :

– humans are born equal on a genetic level (leftism)
– being opressed gives moral authority (leftism)
-main vehicle of history is class struggle (leftism)
– individual s should not have identity tied to nation or tradition, hyper-atomization (leftism)
– freedom to act degenerate, to have public sex, urinate in public, remove morality norms, act sacrilegious by mocking religion and tradition (leftism)
– denial of historical experience and tradition in favor of radical progressivism (leftism)
– linear [Whig] view of history

– humans are not born equal (right wing)

– hierarchy must exist (based on lineage[aristocracy, monarchy], based on financial competitveness[libertrarian], based on obedience to God[theocracy], based on genetic worth [National-Socialist Germany + everyone who believe d in eugenics], based on military rank [militarism] )

You think leftists don’t believe in the need for hierarchy? Wut? They love love love their hierarchy of victimhood. They adore the idea of a communist hierarchy. Communism of course is impossible without an extremely strict hierarchy, for who else would set prices and decide “to each according to their need”?

And since when does “ethnic” come into play for right wing competition? That’s lefty identity politics right there.

Might makes right? Again that’s a lefty position, which is why lefties are always violent. They can’t get their way without violence.

Sure under your definition hitler was right wing, but by the same logic your definition of water would include things the rest of us call fire, car batteries, and raccoon droppings.

I think when people say Hitler was of the left rather than the right they are saying two things. Firstly that the Hitler shares more in common with the most extreme elements on the identifiable left that he railed against and secondly that even allowing for the possibility that this might just be overlap that the traditional distinction between the left and the right conceals more than it reveals.

You are quite right to say Hitler was against equality for instance, or the idea that the oppressed should rise up and achieve parity with the ‘strong’ but the question is, even if we traditionally associate egalitarianism with the left rather than the right, is that sufficient to identify the left in contradistinction to the right, and even if so, is it (or any other factor you mentioned) enough to achieve a meaningful distinction?

There is a tradition of seeing politics in terms of left versus right, and it’s most obvious source is Rousseau, who considered that people are all born free but “everywhere they are in chains” …..and that tradition continues with Marx, for instance as in “you proles have nothing to lose but your chains”. Likewise from Rouseau you also get the idea that people are essentially a blank slate to be written upon. Nobody is arguing that Hitler was a Rousseauist or blank slate believing egalitarian.

The thing is it’s at this point that things get complex. Rousseau also introduced the idea of the general will, which was part majoritarianism (e.g. tyranny of the majority) but would also be tweaked down the line to become the broader (truer) will of the people, which for Marx would become the dictatorship of the proletariat, as well as (in both cases via hegel) working towards the greater purpose of the state or nation (or Volk or whatever)

Traditionally then the (hard) left wants its dictatorship of the proletariat and perhaps an international revolution and the right in reaction wants its greater nation, its ethno-state, but what is common to both is hegelian progress in history (does cyclical history even come into it before spengler & toynbee?) and the apotheosis in practice of the state as the vehicle that will deliver such a utopia. Although the state and the state apparatus is typically a means to an ends (marx considered it would wither away) in reality the state, and with it collectivism and totalitarianism has always been what characterised both of these traditions, even where there might be subtle differences of colour (literally in hitler’s case) with respect to the type collectivism / totalitarianism required to achieve the greater end. This is how Anthony Sutton could explain the paradox of communist / state socialist societies working hand in hand with capitalists and bankers: they were both at heart statist and collectivist before anything else. There was a distinction to be made between what they said they were about, but not with respect to what they delivered.

Other characteristics are simply not enough to definitively identify what is truly left or right. Leftist statism has a poor track level when it comes to achieving equality beyond creating equal levels of poverty and vindictively targeting class enemies etc. You get more of a real concern with equality amongst conservatives, who very often promote equality of opportunity, while despising forced equality of outcomes (or any forced outcomes, such as both communists and nazis promoted).

Right from the outset universalism and nationalism were always hopelessly confused. The french left was often highly nationalistic, or confused (c.f. Bonapartism) and these tensions within movements that shared a common historical / intellectual heritage make it very difficult to meaningfully distinguish left / right or even fascism / anti-fascism. Both the left and the right reflects a will to power to be achieved specifically through not Nietzsche’s individualist overman, but through state intervention (often on a massive scale) and through totalitarian control of society and people’s lives.

As for Hitler, to the extent that it is even a a meaningful term, no-one ever did more harm to the right, nor to the idea of the nation, and looking after the interests of your people / race. Ultimately totalitarians are all of a piece and distinguishing the one kind from the other is becoming increasingly less meaningful

couldn’t agree more, certainly in practice. I’ve heard some suggest that fascism is a necessary preparatory stage for communism. Like you I can’t tell the difference between the two beyond the better dress sense involved in the former

Hitler was a globalist as well as a socialist leftist (but I repeat myself). He just tried to use direct conquest instead of a moocher class voting for their own extinction. Had he been a nationalist he would have stayed inside the German borders, cleaned out the gene pool as per his designs, and nobody would have cared what he did there.

Their entire regime was hell bent on making more German babies and having larger families, not sure where homosexuality would come into play. But being a biased jew and skilled in the arts of propaganda and deception, I could see why the author wrote that book

He was 100% against communism (if you accept his words to be true in Mein Kampf). But that was primarily because he believed (as most Europeans did) that communism had been overtaken by the Jews). He had sympathy for the rights of the German worker, which would make him “socialist,” using the somewhat loaded term.

If he was against communism because he thought it was ‘jewish’ then that doesn’t necessarily mean he was completely against communism, but against a particular brand so to speak. Also, my impression for what it’s worth (I haven’t actually read it yet) is that Mein Kampf was a public political explanation of his position and if so can’t really be assumed to be a necessarily frank “confession”.

Here is a link to something which suggests that Hitler despite his ‘opposition’ may have been consciously aware of owing a debt to marxism / communism

These terms (such as socialism) have become so contorted that both Hitler and Bernie Sanders can identify themselves as such, even though they would have been very much at odds. So oft times, these terms can serve as a hedge maze of sorts, hiding the deeper issues (which are often tied up in race, identity and nationalism).

yeah, I agree with that. I just think that when communism and fascism are concerned the left/right dichotomy doesn’t suffice. People like Hannah Arendt rightly saw that the shared totalitarianism was arguably a far more significant factor than anything that divided them

I’d say his particular aversion to communism related to its perceive threat to germany / europe i.e. to its internationalism. In a sense Nazi Germany was a kind of Socialism in One Country, although since Hitler stood for nationalism and against internationalism, that, unlike in Trotsky influenced Russia would go without saying.

As I’ve pointed out below, he admitted in private to have been highly influenced by marxism, and those who publicly he only opposed

Communism never died, it morphed, most people still think USSR and Iron curtain, that was a test run on the poor Christian Russian folk. It is easier to let people think they are free and control them with words and veiled threats than using direct force.

Political Correctness is a great tool used highly effectively, people self censor to the point of stupidity. You can’t say that is what I hear on a regular basis, when challenged the response generally is, because you can’t. No idea why just because… Sheep

“Communism never died, it morphed, most people still think USSR and Iron curtain, that was a test run on the poor Christian Russian folk. It is easier to let people think they are free and control them with words and veiled threats than using direct force.”

True. The murderous purging done by the communists was messy and, ultimately, these methods have been replaced with persuasive arguments that lead to destruction: “pro-choice,” 24/7 bong hits, self-chosen sterility, etc.

Why kill someone when you can just convince them to remove themselves from the game?

It’s actually pretty amazing. Communism does literally nothing well. Everything decays and dies as soon as you run out of the stored wealth of the previous free market. And yet it keeps surviving and spreading throughout the world. It’s as if your retarded wheelchair bound cousin who couldn’t figure out a modern toilet somehow managed to take over the nation like an 80s super villain.

You forgot to mention steemit.com
It’s like a better version of reddit that also pay you for the content you create. Don’t go expecting a living out of it. But a great blockchain based site with extra income for what you are already doing is more than excellent.

When I got banned from freakbook, it was a bit of a shock to the system. Even though I did antagonize a lot of the worthless leftist spooge, it was good to keep up with friends and family. However, streaming live murders for over a billion people to see, an insidious employee lynch mob against anything conservative, and blatant double standards when it comes to hate speech, I do not miss it now some 6 months later. I’m sure I won’t be missing it at all in a year. I do wish I had access to the skydiving gear groups though. I need a new container and parachute. Alas….

What do you expect from a Rothschild sponsored banker, with globalist (communist) ambitions

“To this end, it strengthens the repression of non-public provocations, defamation and insult of a racist, sexist, homophobic or handiphobic nature”

The above is from the rough translation. Handiphobic is a word apparently, because the right wing nutters without hands would like nothing more than to genocide everybody with hands (although they would have to do so with their feet I imagine). Actually it appears it relates to fear of being handicapped, or of having a handicapped child.

Obviously that’s the least of the matter if it’s isn’t simply a mis-translation. What it represents is actually quite interesting. Those pointing out the similarity here to the kind of informant fuelled communist society of the good old days are right but what is significant perhaps is that these kind of measures are rather desperate and highly likely to backfire: the whole point of communist PC was that the communism was supposed to be invisible, and the thought control invisible with it. People are supposed to be self-governing with respect to their right thoughts and while that will always involve naggy little bitches informing on everyone it is the mere fact of interpersonal correction that is supposed to perform the regulation, and permit self-governance. In other words, the fact that TPTB are increasingly resorting to legislation with heavy fines or imprisonment means that the experiment in self-governance and mind control is not working as planned.

So the question becomes, is over-reaching like this a sign of strength or weakness? Well obviously the latter.

The world has come to the brink of disaster because of the sanctimonious manner and almost
dutiful way the masses accept their craven animal needs as virtues. The animal emotions you feel
are those that rise as you descend.

Yep. They had to have an axis of allies save them from the Germans last century. Now they don’t have any outside help to save them from the Mooslem invasion. Also, their government, just like Germany, is welcoming that invasion with open arms. I say GOOD RIDDANCE!!!!

This crackdown in speech is because of one thing. Immigration and diversity. French people have no problems with gays, trannies etc but this suppression of speech is because the French hate this immigrant takeover of their country and are sayings so on social media… This is coming to the USA as we are seeing now…

Can’t comprehend why some Countries in the West “fell in love” with the so called “mass immigration”, especially muslims !! Ignoring the burden on Tax Payers, the People, the Resources, the Facilities and whatnot !?

Jews are globalist, open border advocates. It is in their nature to lash out at anything that harms their narrative. The last thing jews want to see is a unified white nation. Why do you think neocons and liberals alike dislike russia so much?

The way things are going it’s likely a terrorist attack is going to smash the Eiffel Tower to pieces and the Government will be cracking down asap on anyone who says bad things about Muslims in the current insane situation.

It should be noted that, like it or not, the health care system will have to apply some kind of metric when it decides who should remain alive. I’m not so much talking about productivity, as I am cost. Keeping an old person in a Nursing Home costs the taxpayer about $80,000 a year. Multiply that by tens of millions, and you’ll see the problem. And then there is the social cost; like retarded kids who get “mainstreamed” into regular classrooms. They are nothing but a burden to the other children.

What we need is a set of equations that allow us to calculate when someone has outlived his or her usefulness. Of course, quality of life will have to be factored into the equation. This should be quite easy to do, because the left has already developed the equations. What they want is to provide all citizens with equality of outcome; in order to guarantee that everyone has a good life. So for example, if you have a bad job (like cutting grass) you’ll automatically be compensated with a good sex life. Everyone will be equally happy.

Even getting old will have its compensations. Free medical, free travel, free everything. That’s why the old folks are going along with this. What they don’t want is for these equations to be used against them. That’s why family Venn diagrams are forbidden.

To explain further, I’d like to talk about a computer process called expressive processing. This is a story-telling technique that draws real people into an imaginary universe. “High-Level Author Goals” are the hidden priorities that the actors never see. They only see “Character Goals.” The author goals can really be thought of as National Policy. Some examples would be inter-racial romantic stories, heroic old people stories, Mexican friend stories, Muslim love stories, etc. The computer blends the stories so that each actor finds happiness within a larger framework that he will never understand. The problem, of course, is that the author goals can only be achieved if society itself is destroyed. The actors have to be completely flexible, and can’t be loyal to any existing value-system. The system itself is designed to generate fictions: No truth allowed. That’s why it doesn’t matter if Europe is overrun by Muslims, or if America is overrun by Mexicans. People are only data. What’s particularly frightening about this plan is that the system is designed to eliminate human creativity, and replace it with the “appearance” of creativity. To prove the point, a computer program called “Brutus” was written, which the developers claim has as much creative potential as any human.http://articles.latimes.com/2000/may/28/news/mn-35062

Blacks in particular are behind this plan, because they have so much to gain. Access to white females, guaranteed employment, and manufactured personal happiness. The plan is scheduled to go into effect over the next twenty years. Right now, the system is waiting for implants to become more popular; and for young people to take a more favorable view towards communism.

Stopping it is easy. Teach people the system, so they can use it for their own benefit.

Probably got that law because a French woman these days is likely to be more likely to be impregnated by Muhammed or Ahmed than Pierre or Sebastian. No other group of women in Europe crave Arab cocks more than the French, that is why you see so many half caste people in France. I think Germany is rapidly catching up to France, almost 20 years ago it was extremely rare for white German women to date Muslims, now its very common, reminds me of France in the late 1990s.

The end result of Jewish multiculturalism. What did you expect? People in Europe cannot even vent their feelings on social media, while Israeli civilians are trained in self defense, survival, and can own weapons. Not to mention little Muslim girls get denied entrance at movie theaters in Tel Aviv to see Harry Potter, I can understand security being suspicious of a 6’4″ 240 pound Arab male, but a little girl? If that was done in Paris or London, it would be all over the news.
Also if they cannot afford the high cost of living in an Israeli city, they can take land away from Palestinians in the occupied territories and get full protection from their government. Most non Muslims are pushed out of areas dominated by Muslims all over Western Europe, there were even cases in Germany, where Germans were evicted from their own homes to make way for refugees.

Muslim Harvard Law student called Jews “smelly” in front of an Israeli speaker. The Jewish students defended the Muslim, found that interesting because Jews tend to be hypersensitive to any slight against their kind.

if you think for a minute that VPNs are independant entities you’re a fool. You can’t escape the technology that the deep state has in its hands. It’s way more advanced that we think it is. Nothing is anonymous on the web, nothing.

Whoever comes to my door for something like this will not return to their jewish pedophile masters, at least not in one piece.

Take a stand gents, they’re getting desperate. I say they’ve lost their ability to gamble properly. I’m calling their bluff, keep trolling them and keep angering them with the incessant behavior they wish to control. It will only make them concede more ground as their narrative shatters further.

“Re-education” that is what happened to a character in the film “The Running Man” which takes place in a totalitarian America in the year 2017, that movie came out in 1987, we still are not in that kind of society, but its getting there.

I keep hoping someday normal people will have had enough and draw the line but at the moment it doesn’t look to good.
For what it’s worth, allowing a government to determine what hate speech is and punish people for it sets a precedent of later allowing the government to determine ALL speech as good or bad and punishing people for it. That old slippery slope as they say.
I recall having an internet discussion with a leftist about the US Bill Of Rights, they stated well in Europe they don’t have “free speech ” but they can say what they want.
Not any more.

Commentors are saying Hitler was right, Hitler was left…. Hitler was Hitler. Who was Hitler? Affirmed vegetarian. Pro-abortion. Hated smokers. Not a fan of marriage. Or the church. Catholic or otherwise. If he was right wing, he was the most liberal, left wing, butthurt right wing ever born. Think he was a right winger? Be an actual student of history and stop accepting the bullcorn that liberal professors and educators puke out.

Many are now studying history for the first time. I have learned Hitler was neither right nor left. He was woke as fuck and turned to authoritarianism BECAUSE the situation was dire and voting never fixed any problems. Watch this and learn how he eliminated the unemployment rate. 1) introduce a singles tax. 2) Introduce a marriage bonus (and another for 4 kids plus). 3) Once married, the wife MUST leave the workforce. Employment went to 100%, baby boom, and VW and the ENTIRE GERMAN MANUFACTURING GIANT was born.

‘How does one man assert his power over another, Winston?’
Winston thought. ‘By making him suffer,’ he said.
‘Exactly. By making him suffer. Obedience is not enough. Unless he is suffering, how can you be sure that he is obeying your will and not his own? Power is in inflicting pain and humiliation. Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of your own choosing. Do you begin to see, then, what kind of world we are creating? It is the exact opposite of the stupid hedonistic Utopias that the old reformers imagined. A world of fear and treachery and torment, a world of trampling and being trampled upon, a world which will grow not less but MORE merciless as it refines itself. Progress in our world will be progress towards more pain. The old civilizations claimed that they were founded on love or justice. Ours is founded upon hatred. In our world there will be no emotions except fear, rage, triumph, and self-abasement. Everything else we shall destroy — everything. Already we are breaking down the habits of thought which have survived from before the Revolution. We have cut the links between child and parent, and between man and man, and between man and woman. No one dares trust a wife or a child or a friend any longer. But in the future there will be no wives and no friends. Children will be taken from their mothers at birth, as one takes eggs from a hen. The sex instinct will be eradicated. Procreation will be an annual formality like the renewal of a ration card. We shall abolish the orgasm. Our neurologists are at work upon it now. There will be no loyalty, except loyalty towards the Party. There will be no love, except the love of Big Brother. There will be no laughter, except the laugh of triumph over a defeated enemy. There will be no art, no literature, no science. When we are omnipotent we shall have no more need of science. There will be no distinction between beauty and ugliness. There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed. But always — do not forget this, Winston — always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — for ever.’

This is the goal… but you can see even today with the ANTIFA scum doing the stomping… THE NUMBERS OF HUMAN BEINGS THAT LOVE AND NOT HATE… is near infinite. Those who wish to use fear over humanity as complete control… will lose. There is simply too little hate in the world to base a tyranny on it.

Bah, like a lot of french laws and actions, it’s just all about claiming and monkeying but in fact, nothing else.
Deleting Facebook and all shitty social media , stop watching tv and reading newspapers, ditching left leaning people is the better way to get out of all this bullshit, pseudo orwellian laws or not.

The BBC has already decided to get you sacked if it doesn’t like your political opinions.

‘BBC will shop viewers to their BOSS if they post ‘offensive’ online comments in shock new policy blasted as ‘Orwellian’ by privacy campaigners
EXCLUSIVE: BBC says personal information can be used if users are ‘offensive’
Policy sparks furious backlash online with corporation accused of ‘blackmail’
Free speech campaigner Tom Slater says: ‘That anyone could draft this without getting flashes of Nineteen Eighty-Four is beyond me’

The USA would already have these laws if not for the constitution. We already do have similar things on college campuses. Our constitution will provide some protection, but eventually, they can get around that too. Especially as even our republican majority is backing down like whipped doggies.

I love historical French culture, but I no longer have any real desire to set foot in that country again, even though it was my college major, I lived there four of the happiest years of my life in the 80’s. Ditto for all of the Western European Caliphate.

You know… I was thinking in all seriousness this has to be a sarc/joke article. As in… “this is how bad things could get.” But then I kept reading and realized… this is no joke. This is actually happening.